 Okay, let's start and Pascal has already started to wish everybody a good day, so a good day to everybody and I really hope that we can get as much out of this really important information session co-hosted by the Guild of European Research Intensive Universities and the African Research Universities Alliance. And I want to extend a special welcome to Dr. Obed Ogega who's the Senior Program Officer of the African Academy of Sciences and who's really supporting this program and we'll hear from him in a short while. But first let me just briefly explain the rationale for this event. The Guild and Arua have had a very strong collaboration since 2018 so the Guild represents 21 Research Intensive Universities in Europe, the African Research Universities Alliance represents 16 Research Universities in Africa, and we have both come together around a shared conviction that our major global challenges can only be addressed in partnership and in a partnership that must extend beyond a single continent. Africa has got a particular place here because when you think about the future and when you think about our future demographic developments around the world, then Africa clearly is the continent where the demographic growth is going to be strongest and so it's impossible to imagine that we will be able to embrace our challenges and overcome our challenges over the next decades without Africa being a full partner there and that works for science and it works for other areas. And so what's important to both organizations is the principle of equity between partners in those scientific relationships and for that it's really important that the science base not just of Europe but also of Africa is strengthened. And so we have developed a very careful list of policy recommendations to policymakers both in the European Union and in the African Union to ensure the scientific capacity of Africa and of African universities is enhanced at all levels, whether it's research administration, whether it's PhD students and doctoral programs, whether it's early career scientists, but it or whether it's the develop the creation of clusters of excellence. So that we can really strengthen that research base and ensure that that we can address global challenges effectively together. And so from from that perspective we really welcome the arise pilot program it is still a pilot program but because we're committed to this point of strengthening research capacities. It's really important to us that the arise program is a success so that we see in the future, a program like the rise program on a permanent basis on an annual basis, and on a much bigger scale but for that. It's really important to us all that this first pilot call is is a success. And I can already see in when we look at the, the call for applicants that it also, there are, it's incredibly impressive pilot program. One of the things that we recognize in Europe that are really important for outstanding frontier research there is a clear dedication here to ground breaking science there's a real commitment here to high risk and high gain research. It's also really notable that just as in Europe. There's, we're now developing a much greater preparedness to ensure that all our publications are open access and that there's a really that there's a genuine gender balance, both in the research team but also that we think in the way that we articulate our research questions and challenges. And of course again we see that really reflected in the rise school so it's a really phenomenally important call is a really interesting call. It's a milestone and and but there is an important policy context to this. And for that reason, I just want to invite Laura Roye who is the sea who is a policy officer at the guild to just give a very brief outline to the policy context. This is also in the rise program. Laura, the floor is yours. Yeah. Okay. Good. So good afternoon, everyone. And some Laura Royer and policy officer at the guild. And I will give you now a brief introduction to the policy context around the arise goal. And so, the reason why we think it might be interesting for you to discuss the policy context now is that you might have seen that the guide for applicants in the guide for applicants that your proposals should be taking into account the priorities of the AU EU high level policy dialogue on science technology and innovation. So there is a clear reference to the policy frame around around the call. And, but before even going to this specific priorities for science. I just wanted to give you some information on the broader cooperation framework between Africa and Europe to understand a little bit like more also what these priorities for science come from. So, importantly, the, the political dialogue between Africa and Europe has been framed by a cooperation platform or cooperation framework called the Africa EU partnership. Since 2000. And in practice it translates into summits between the EU and the AU to discuss and establish joint political priorities between the two continents. And I'm not going through, I'm not going through now all the history of this Africa EU partnership but the most important parts for for also for you as as researchers is probably that first of all in in 2007. The second EU Africa summit in Lisbon. The, the participants agreed for the publication on the joint Africa EU strategy, which sets out the strategic priorities for the two continents. And in this price in this strategy which is very broad and encompasses a lots of different areas of stemming from trade to research education and so on. Research is really recognized as an engine as a tool for promoting human and social development for promoting agriculture and food security. Perhaps the most important really in the context of this cold cold and the development of knowledge based societies know that that was the first milestone in a way, which is very important because these are priorities that were jointly agreed between between the two regions. And so that's on the one hand, and on the other hand, the other important thing that you might wish to know about is that during the fifth summit in Abidjan in 2017. The participants agreed to to really focus the summit on on youth in a way as a way to to invest for accelerated growth and sustainable development. And from this summit, a declaration also came out, which also sets out some priorities for a new EU cooperation. And here again we have really this focus this emphasis now because it's really the first priority on investing in people. And this investing in people includes education science technology skills development, which is of course very, very much where we are within the framework of this rice school. And then finishing this slide just for for your information in 2022 so next year normally they should be the next summit of the of the EU and EU and from there, they might be there might be other other priorities or at least the reaffirmation of these priorities that have been discussed previously. This is for the joint strategies and priorities between the EU and the EU, but they are also unilateral strategies that were published by both sides of both Europe and and Africa sites that I would like just to to touch upon quickly because they in a way echo and dialogue with these joint priorities. Very briefly first of all, in 2020. So last year, the European Commission published a communication, which was called towards a comprehensive strategy with Africa, which, in a way, is the commission's vision for the summit that I've just referred to now that will be taking place next year. And so, in this document the commission the European Commission identifies areas of cooperation so five areas of cooperation between between Europe and Africa. And one of these areas of cooperation is a partnership for sustainable growth and jobs. So here you see you have again this emphasis on sustainability and on job creation. And within this priority, the commission sets as a goal, the increase access to quality education skills research innovation and health and social rights. So these, of course, comes comes. It calls very much the elements that that were published before that were agreed upon. And on the, on the other side, we have this even much more massive and comprehensive document that was published by the EU so before in 2013. It's called Agenda 2063 you might have heard about it. It's basically the African governments joint vision for the future of the continent but it's really like looking, looking to the future now because it's 50 years from here. And one of the goal or one of the aggregate goals is to build a prosperous Africa, which would be based on inclusive growth and sustainable development. And this will be taking place through the training of well educated citizens and skills revolution, underpinned by science technology and innovation. So I think what you what you can really remember from this is that from the beginning. The focus or the way why the way research is embedded into this broader EU Africa partnership is really through like development of sustainable societies and inclusive growth, sustainable growth. Finally, coming back a little bit more to the to the specific reference that is in the guide for applicants. And what I wanted to tell you briefly is that these, these priorities that are outlined in the guide for applicants come from a meeting that took place in 2020 between research and innovation ministers of the EU and the EU, which took place in 2019 context so it was very much revolving revolving around this question and about how research and innovation can really help overcoming the COVID-19 crisis. And during this meeting they also agreed and identified key areas of research and innovation cooperation between the two continents. So the four areas that are outlined in the guide for applicants, as you might remember, so there is public health, green transition, innovation and technology, and capacities for science and capacities for science in particular is is very interesting and is like also a little bit like an umbrella, an umbrella element for for others that covers as as Jan was mentioning just before open science as a priority, developing capacity for science advice for policy. Improving the gender balance in research and innovation. And finally, last but not least, human capital development, which here again echoes the strategies or the broader strategy that we focus on this role of research as a as a way to develop sustainable society, you know, and investing in this thing in people. And this is this is the context in which the the arise call was was developed. And now I think I've already spoken enough of policy, let's let's give back the floor to Obed Ogega will be giving a more detailed presentation on the call, and after will be available for to answer the questions you might have. Thank you very much Laura and Leon for that very useful foundation or framework for the presentation today. My work becomes easy. Now that the policy framework has already been elaborated. And I appreciate that. Thank you very much. So allow me to share my slides. Okay, I hope you can see my slides. Yes, yes we can. Thank you. That is a gentleman. Good afternoon. My name is Obed Ogega. I am a senior program officer at the African Academy of Sciences, currently leading the team implementing the arise grant. So, perhaps just some context so that we get to understand the African Academy of Sciences and the framework, or you know, the foundation that then inspires the design of the arise call. So the African Academy of Sciences is an African non-aligned non-political, not-for-profit organization, headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, with five regional offices, the one for North Africa being in Egypt, the Western African one being in Bukna Faso, Central Africa in Cameroon, East Africa in Kampala, Uganda and the Southern African one in Johannesburg, South Africa. So the African Academy of Sciences has three mandates, the first of which is recognizing excellence through fellowships and other initiatives. The second one is providing advisory and think tank functions. And the third one, where I work, where the arise grant is anchored, is on implementing key STI programs. So we, the implementation of the, you know, programs and the STI agenda is really done through the platform called the Alliance for Accelerating Excellence in Science in Africa, or ISA, that is co-owned by the African Union and the African Academy of Sciences. And the vision for the Academy is to see transformed lives. And we do this through leveraging resources, through research excellence and through leadership. I thought leadership, sorry, for sustainable development. The African context or the, you know, where we come from in our research context, climate change is a big issue across Africa. I mean, that is not, there's a scientific consensus on climate change and its impact across various sectors, you know, in our economy. Food security or insecurity is also a challenge in the continent, prevailing poverty conditions and high disease burden. I mean, these are some of the challenges that face Africa and African researchers in general. So it's again is this background that the ISA applied from all the African Academy of Sciences five years ago came up with a business plan, angered on four goals, the first of which will be to build on research and, you know, iron research and development leadership and environments that will then support vibrant research ecosystems across our institutions in Africa. The second one will be to support the development of an innovation and science driven entrepreneurial culture so that, you know, products from our universities and research institutions then get to the market and ultimately benefit the people for which they are intended. The third goal, and this is where the rice ground falls is really to identify and support rising research leaders to stay and build their careers in Africa. And the fourth most important for me is targeting critical gaps in the research landscape so that if we do not have enabling environments, then our researchers will be finding it very difficult to successfully implement their research projects in our institutions. And having these goals, you know, for the past five years or so we've had the privilege of implementing a few programs, some of which may be familiar to you. And I would focus on the rising and emerging leaders strand where they are raised grand peace. Basically, these are postdoctoral fellowships but also research support initiatives for early career scientists in general, as we work with them towards being established researchers on the continent. The idea is Laura talked about the agenda 2063. The idea is that we need to create critical mass of research leaders that are then going to provide a scientific evidence that we need in response to Africa's immediate and future developmental priorities and challenges. And we are glad that we've been able to do a few, you know, contribute quite a number of cohorts into this critical mass that we talk about over the years. And the arise grant is a welcome addition to this. And we are we looking forward really looking forward to getting to see the cohorts that comes up and the interesting projects that they will be implementing as we go forward. Okay, we don't do these alone. We thrive on partnerships. And we really appreciate the support that we get from institutions, you know, regionally, or even globally that are really working together with the African Academy of Sciences, even as we look forward, you know, we as we strive towards achieving the transformation that we need for the continent. Okay, so a bit of a snapshot on where we are or the funding that has been mobilized so far on the continent 112 million, at least 112 million, she does may have changed now. I think this was from early in the year, but the last five years or so, an investment of about 112 million dollars has been made on the African continent on various automatic areas. And the countries marked in blue are those where we have strong footprint. This is particularly one of the reasons why in the arise grant we made it deliberate, you know, we deliberately set out to try and provide at least 40 grants in at least 40 countries, so that the countries in gray get to that number gets to reduce so that we don't leave anyone behind. I'll be talking about that in a few shortly. So, in terms of the expectations for our research leaders, then a few things that we expect our, you know, imagine research leaders to achieve in their fellowships, and the first of which is really the need for these researchers to provide or to generate world class research and innovation. Okay, while our focusing is in Africa, the research that is produced from the fellowships that we give must be globally competitive, even as it is locally relevant. The second expectation is that our emerging research leaders should be, you know, prudent financial managers, so to speak, so that they are able to provide that research leadership to the younger generation coming after them. And that means they have to be prudent in their finances so that we also have a station of resource use efficiency for better or bigger impact. We, even as we expect them to do this, we also expect them to grow and progress in their professional pathways, and ultimately become the established researchers that they seek to be. We expect them to build networks, you know, intra Africa collaborations, but also collaborations, even outside of the African continent so that there is skills transfer we are required, and ultimately build ourselves on our research capacity as a continent to address our priorities like I said and leadership among other things, and most importantly, a strong emphasis on community and public engagement and communication, so that our research does not end at our libraries and shelves in our research institutions, whether it gets translated and ultimately get to benefit the people for whom the research is is is meant. So this brings me you know having given you a background, or you know the synopsis of what really inspired the design of the rice grant. I'd like to speak a few things for the highlights of the grant it's still open for applications until 30th of July. I should say that we're doing this in two phases so the current face is the expressions of interest, or a preliminary application if you may, just a few questions that are supposed to help us filter applications based on the set eligibility, after which, then the qualifying applicants are invited to submit full applications, and the grant is supported, you know, generously by the European Commission, in the tune of about 25 million euros, and we hope to award up to 500,000 euros to at least 14 dependent researchers that then supports their research teams to produce the cutting age research that we talked about earlier. So the main objective for the rice grantees to broaden and strengthen Africa's science base through open and directed direct continental competition for funding, so that ultimately we contribute to the transformation of Africa into a knowledge based and innovation led continent. Okay. Like I said, the target is at least 40 emerging African research leaders across 40 countries, 40 African countries I should say. And like Laura said, the proposals are open to all African researchers in all areas of scientific endeavor, but reflecting on the priorities of the African Union, European Union high level policy dialogue, STI. And most importantly, demonstrate the capacity to deliver cutting edge research so that it's not enough to just have a research proposal that reflects on this EU EU priorities. The idea is that it should be, you know, cutting edge research, like I said, globally competitive so that we are able to achieve a bigger impact. And the pilot phase, this grant like John said is a pilot phase, and particularly for this particular grant we're targeting people that obtain their PhDs, at least two years ago and not more than seven years ago. But with the considerable and demonstrable research leadership experience, I know this definition can be controversial, but I made us to focus on the definition in the context of their rise grant. One other aspect that we really put a lot of emphasis on is the ability of the PI or the applicant to provide research leadership to the teams, because we'd require that the PI is engaged at least four master students and at least two PhD students. So that if these postgraduate students are to be mentored and provided with that research leadership that we need, then the PI should be able to, you know, should have the capacity to do so. So that's why we need a bit of considerable and demonstrable research leadership experience, in addition to just having obtained your PhD, you know, for the time period that has been mentioned. And we don't do everything that the African Academy of Sciences alone, we work with others, and among the committees that have been put in place is the Scientific Advisory Committee, which is comprised of eminent African and European scientists that then provide that scientific independence and leadership on the implementation of the project. The SAC or the Scientific Advisory Committee will be working with the reviewer partners on thematic areas so that ultimately they help, you know, shortlist the best candidates to conduct the best research. So like I said, the RISE grants are implemented in two phases. So the first one, the call, the first part of the call is the expressions of interest, which is still ongoing, been opened since the think of June, and we'll be closing on the 30th of July. And the idea is that after the expressions of interest, qualifying candidates will be invited to submit for applications, the submission will be open for about two months, after which an expert review process takes place, including interviews, and eventually, if all goes well, the grants are supposed to begin, the fellowships are supposed to begin in April or May of next year. So I've talked about the Scientific Advisory Committee, which reports to, you know, provide support to the African Academy of Sciences implementation team, but also feeds into or provides information to the Strategic Steering Committee, which is comprised of representatives from the Independent Commission, the African Union Commission, and the African Academy of Sciences. So this, like I said, again, the independent technical reviewers. So these are, you know, reviewers, experts in different fields of research put together according to the thematic areas or their fields of research, so that they can provide, you know, they can make the reviews and help through the candidate selection process. So I think I'd like to stop there for now and welcome any questions that we may have. Thank you very much for your listening. Wonderful, but we already have a rich array of questions here. So maybe start with the one that's got the most votes, which is the, which is from Annaline Malotsi, who asked that the call documents say that we need to work out the budget in euros, but the grant portal template is in US dollars. So which, what should applicants do? Which is the correct one to use? Thank you very much. And my apologies for that. Our system has been very adamant to change to euros. And it still maintains the words USD, even when we acquired you in the instructions to provide the budget in euros. So please provide the budget in euros and the full applications template will be better than this one. Okay, thank you. So then the next one is from Amir, who Amir Patelu asked whether one can apply for 300,000 euros for a period of less than five years, for instance, for a three-year project. Well, the guide for applicants says up to 500,000 and up to five years. So where a particular PI wants to apply for a shorter period, for a shorter, you know, a small amount of money, they're welcome to submit the applications and then the review committee will make the recommendations based on the information provided. Okay. And can, can masters and PhD bursaries and scholarships be included in the budget and that the question comes from Dionne Myles, because she says that the guidelines only mentioned a stipend for research assistance, and she quotes stipends for the principal investigator and research assistants, i.e. PhD and master students who are part of the principal investigators team. So can PhD bursaries and scholarships be included in the budget? Yes, in that guide for applicants, the master students or the postgraduate students students in general are referred to as the research assistants, so that the PI then gets to pay for their stipends. And how you structure the support you give to the postgraduate students is left at the discretion of the PI, subject to the provisions of the host institution. We understand that different institutions do things a little differently. Whether you want to put their costs as direct research costs or other direct research costs or under personal cost, that will be at the discretion of the PI. So please work with the grant accountants of your host institution and let them advise you accordingly. But yes, the postgraduate students should be supported through the grant. And then staying with Dionne Myles, who asked another popular question where she was really talking about the network building and the intra-African collaborations. Because you say that you want that to promote this as a priority, but at the same time the guidelines say, and she quotes again, where cross-country collaborations are established, at least 70% of the research team should be of the same nationality as the host institution. So can you just explain that, is there a tension between the proportion of researchers you want to come from one country, the host country and the intra-African collaborations? Thank you for that question and it's an important question. The bottom line is that we are aiming to provide support to at least 40 researchers in at least 40 countries. So if you do a partnership with multiple countries and say, for example, you apply as an applicant from Kenya, but most of your work could be done, more than 70% of your work could be done outside of Kenya, then it becomes difficult to quantify or to actually say that that research support was actually given to the research in Kenya. So the short answer to your question is, yes, we encourage intra-Africa or even collaborations outside of the African continent, but provided that most of the work that you propose to do is done in the host country that you propose to do. And partnerships or collaboration can take different forms. It does not mean that, for example, if you're collaborating with a supervisor or a collaborator in Europe, that you actually provide a budget for that supervisor or collaborator to hire staff that are then going to implement your research from that second institution. So provided that most of your research work is done at the host institution, observing the 70% requirement, you can do collaborations elsewhere, but make sure that that observation of the 70% requirement is that you have to. Right. Okay. And then there's a question that was already voted as a great question, which is that, and it's inspired by the UK pulling out some of their international funding. What guarantee do we have that the EU doesn't do the same and that in a sense, given the amount of money that's at stake, researchers will be in yet two of the grants say will suddenly be high and dry. That is a good question and it's unfortunate that you know the funding from the UK, for example, earlier this year was a shock at once, it actually affected the African Academy of Sciences through some of the programs that were implemented. We cannot be sure what happens tomorrow, we can only ride on the support that we have today and the commitment, which is a strong commitment from the European Commission, that this money has already been set aside, and we are confident that we should be able to implement the program to completion as proposed. So while you cannot preempt exactly what happens tomorrow, what I can confirm as of now is the commitment that we have from the European Commission to implement the grant as proposed. We hope nothing disrupts that arrangement so that it goes to completion, I mean, such as life you can't really be sure about tomorrow, but as of today it looks good. And Obed, if I may add to that, so the EU is an incredibly complex organization and it takes 27 member states about three years to really agree on a budget over a seven year time frame, so it's very, very complex. But once they have agreed, then in a sense the time frame for a seven year budget period is set and that budget period just started in 2021. So as you said, Obed, things are always possible in the future, but unlike national governments where budgets are set from one year to the next in the EU, that's not quite the same. I mean within this seven year framework there are still annual budgets, but in a sense we have a little bit more certainty about the budget envelope that the EU has to play with over the next seven years than we would have in any national context. So that might be an additional piece of information to give you some frame, some piece of mind. Thanks Jan, that's helpful. So Jan van Molen asked whether there is a somewhere that he can contact assist with the technical issues with regard to the online application interface because he's struggling to get his application validated. Yeah, we're happy to assist. So please write to us. I'll text the email address for a rise or please write to us. We'll be happy to assist. I'll put the email address on the text. Okay, good. So then Samuel Bunani has gotten a number of questions here. So maybe to start off, is there any template of the project proposal in the project's mission steps? So it's a questionnaire. I mean the online submission platform is a questionnaire, so you move from one question to the next. So that will be the template. And the eligibility criteria of the host institutions are not clear, he says in the call documents, do you have any specific specifications for that? We're trying not to be too prescriptive. So long as this is a host institution that has, that is a legal entity is African, or best in Africa, and meets all those eligibility items that have been listed. The host institution should basically qualify, but where you are not sure, please write to us. We are happy to clarify because again, institutions take different shapes and forms. We can't really be too prescriptive about it. And in the budget line, are there salary limits for the personnel to be involved in the project? So the salary or the stipends to be allocated depend on the HR provisions for the host institution. So please refer to the HR provisions of the host institutions and work with the grant accountants to help you through that. And in the expression of interest stage, is it necessary to have quotations or offers from companies for expensive equipment that one needs to purchase? Yeah, I mean, I guess getting quotations would guide the budgeting so that you know how much to budget for. Yes, if that helps your application please, by all means. For us, I should also mention that at this stage, we are only requesting for a global budget, so to speak, specifics will be provided in the full applications stage. And therefore documentation won't be required now. Now at this point, it's enough to submit what you know, what has been asked for in the application platform, but if you want to be proactive and get this documentation, that would help. It's not a mandatory requirement, but yeah, sorry. Okay, so Kim Best has asked whether one has to supervise two PhDs or four Master's students during the fellowship or how flexible this is. The four, at least four Master's students and at least two PhD is the minimum that are required to be enrolled in this, in this team. You don't have to be the only supervisor, supervision can be done in that forms, you know, with an arrangement with other collaborators or other supervisors in the host institutions. I mean, we leave that to you so long as apart from the supervision, we expect to actually this is the best requirement that the PI provides. Research leadership to this, you know, postgraduate students, the idea is that you build their capacity so that tomorrow they're able to apply for grants of their own. So that is the bottom line. In terms of supervision, you can, you know, you can do this together with other supervisors in the host institutions, but you have to be part of the team. Thanks. Thanks. And can I, so Muamin Muntala has raised a question that I think one can make a bit more general. So he says, well, he's got his PhD in 2010 doesn't mean that he's completely out. And I think that raises the question about whether there are exceptions, whether, you know, how you account for people with caring responsibilities or maternity leave or whatever. Are there any, is there any flexibility in this two to seven year requirement? So the two to seven year is the best line, but where, you know, for some reason, someone, for example, like you said, took a career break to go and, you know, raise children or take leave or things like that. Feel free to submit your application and provide the justification for it. Our review panel, look at the facts or the information provided and the determination. Okay, thanks. Um, so, uh, then, uh, sorry. So, so, um, so should the PI already have masters and PhD students in mind should they already be named or what this can they just indicate how many students they want to educate and then select recruit them later. If you, if you are able to do that, please do. But then again, remember, you don't want to go from this and God forbid you don't get a grant. But the idea is that you plan for them. For example, can say you don't want a student working on a particular objective in your research proposal and, and have the students recruited once you've secured the grant. So it's okay to just say that you'd expect a master's student or a PhD student to do specific aspects of the work at the proposal stage. Once granted, then you can be the recruitment. Okay. So Dion Miles, another set of highly voted question. How much should we budget for annual audit costs? Do you have an estimated amount that one should budget per year and audit costs encapsulated within the GFGP assessment or are they separate? That's a good question. So, I mean, the audit questions will be different from country to country. So this is the part where you consult with your host institution. Check with them how much they usually spend on such audits and that way you're able to get a figure. It's precisely for that reason that we didn't give a definite amount to put there. So long as it's, I mean, within practice, please feel free to put that and the GFGP process. If I got the question correctly, it shouldn't be part of the audit really the GFGP process is, is, you know, a step that we do before we are what it's a pre grant award process so that it then helps us. You know, assess the eligibility of the host institutions to host successfully host and support the implementation of the arise grant. So that part of the work will be done from our end, we will not require applicants to pay for it. Yeah, unless I didn't get that question right. Okay. And John fundraiser asked whether funding will cover any operational research expenses for instance for the PhD and master students that are to do their field research for instance. Yeah, I mean it's, it's, we, if you look at the guide for applicants we haven't, we haven't predefined what support goes into supporting the postgraduate students. Again, we leave this at the description of the PI but with reference to the HR provisions for the host institution. I'm sure the every host institution has a procedure on how to support postgraduate students and the life. So please work with the host institution and see what the provisions are but ultimately, within the five years plan, you should see the postgraduate students to completion so that you don't start them and in year four and leave them hanging. Okay, thank you and Hilary, Miss Ender asked if you want to add some pieces of equipment on the budget. Where is the provision for doing so on the application form. Please say that again. If you want to add. So she says that I would like to add some pieces of equipment on my budget but there's no provision for this on the application form. Yes, and this is why I said, as of now we're only asking for the global budget. So if you know the equipment. If I were the one applying I would do a full budget, nonetheless, but then half my budget lines grouped into the budget lines that are already provided for in the expressions of interest. So that that gives you the global budget for budget line could be for example that equipment goes into direct costs. Okay, or other research costs, but then at the full application stage then you'll be able to provide a detailed budget. Yeah, I think that's our handle it. So, Jessica Thorne asked the question that I'm sure is on everybody's mind that I'm sure you expected which is really around the, the, the geographical question I guess so the specific question is with regard to the requirement of the ground going to 40 countries. If you're a national of a certain country and working in the host institution of another country. What counts is it your nationality or that of the host institutions, and, and will you only be selecting one proposal per country. I have a good and loaded version and it's one that we expect and two things so fast. Even when we want to, you know, give at least four grants in at least four countries. This should not come at the expense of scientific merit. The first eligibility criteria will be how is the proposed research in terms of the scientific merit. So the first eligibility criteria or assessment will be on the scientific merit remit of the proposal. And once that then is done, the reviewers will then start looking at the geographical presentation of the proposals. But if we go through the, you know, we go through the applications and in terms of the scientific merit, we only have 20 countries making it to the limit, you know, the minimum threshold for that scientific merit that you're looking for. Then we will consider the 20, you know, the applications in the 20 countries. So while we are being ambitious and trying to really not leave anyone behind, it will not be at the cost of scientific merit. So, like the second question from Jessica on whether we focus on the nationality or the host institution nationality. The answer is that we don't focus on the nationality of the applicant. It is where the research is going to be done. So from experience, we, for example, would have an example would have say, you know, a big number of applicants wanting to go do their research in South Africa. Okay. So in that case, if we look at nationalities alone, it will be seen that every nationality is, you know, a bigger number of countries is represented. At the end of the day, all the research is done in one country. So that is why in this particular grant, this particular call for applications, we are focused on where the application or where the grant will be implemented, rather than the nationality. So you're really striking to, you're trying to strike a fine balance because you could, you know, you could see that maybe half of the grants potentially could be done in one country, right. I mean, if you think about just excellence, and you're clearly carefully trying to calibrate this. So I mean, what will you do in ultimately half of the country, if that is the case and half of the really outstanding projects will be in one country. Will that be politically. So the, I mean, this is the challenge with trying to strike a balance. It means that you are going to lose on a few things. But for this particular one. We really want to focus on the scientific excellence, but without leaving anyone behind. So I said that, like I said, if we only get 20 countries meeting that minimum threshold for the scientific criteria, then we stop at that. But because we are aiming to give at least 40 grams. What that means is, we go for the first round, not in terms of you know, the, like I said, the first consideration is scientific merit so X number of applicants are selected based on that. And then they look at the geographical representation and X number of countries are selected. And if by that we don't get the 40 applicants, then we go another round so it can actually be possible to get more than one grant in one country depends on the amount of applications that come. But that is not for me that is for the review panels and this and this advisory committee. Only that from the way I see it, that should be the consideration. So in relation to this. Frick, Frick Ramanami and Geda is asking whether the PI should only be from Africa. Yes, must be an African national. Okay, good. That's, that's clear. And so, can we go back to the question this, the importance of networks, I mean you made a really strong point about this and I'm a part 10 is asking the question about how important into African collaboration is is but maybe just expand the general point about the importance of networks and how applicants might go, go, how they might think about these collaborations in terms of their grants I mean you know the question of international, you know, extra African versus African, how they might bring those together. Thank you. The idea really is, is, is on leverage once you know synergies and strengths, you know, even within a country. It could be that one university strong in physical sciences and the other and it's strong in social sciences or things like that. So if, you know, logically speaking, if you're able to combine synergies then you stand a better chance of having a bigger impact in your proposal. While we, the desire is that we're able to see this intra Africa collaboration again for the spirit of pan Africanism. And also, you know, collaboration so that we get skills transfer we get to leverage on our synergies and ultimately stand a better chance of having a greater impact not just on one part of the continent but you know, not leaving anyone behind. This is not a mandatory requirement. Okay, we know that it's, it's, it's really up to the PR if they feel there's going to be value addition by collaborating with someone else from another institution that they're welcome to do so. If not, no one should feel to be an obligation to do so. It's, it's closely related to transdisciplinary versus one, I think a single discipline in terms of research. So if your proposal be, you know, stands a better chance of benefiting from synergies from other disciplines of research, you know, could be that you're combining physical, biological and the other forms of, you know, other fields of research and you feel it by so doing, you get a bigger impact or make your, your proposal stronger, then you're welcome to do so. But that does not stop someone that wants to focus on their, in their own scientific field to do to propose from that field. Thank you. And can I, sorry, can I just come back to the previous issue around nationality and geography, because there's a supplementary question that I should have picked up earlier, which is, can a permanent resident was not an African national but who has an idea and permanent residency in an African country for over five years apply as a PI. This question has been raised a few times and unfortunately for this particular one, the definition is that you must be an African national. We hope that in the next phases of our race, then we'll be able to open it a little more. But for now I'm focusing on African national. Thank you. And Leslie Cornish is asking a question, can somebody with who already has a post in a university take this in addition. So they would might then not take the stipend but they might use the money for students for instance. And it's a good question. It's a it's really good question. So the question is remember the grant provides or request that the PIS commits at least 80% of their full time equivalent on the arise grant. Okay. So, it's up to the PR if if you're able to do that, you know, take up other responsibilities. Or arrangements at the university but still, you know, be able to dedicate at least 80% of your time on the grant and you can do so. Otherwise what I see happening is that you, you can request your university to give you protected time to conduct or to implement the arise grant. And then have them hire someone who'd be a temporary staff or something to take off the load, the workload that you would otherwise be implementing if you are full time employee. So that that way you buy, so to speak, you buy your protected time to conduct the arise grant, but the requirement, you know, the 80% minimum time commitment on the grant is a serious requirement and everyone will have to show that. There is a question that adding up salary costs and funding for students results in a budget overshooting the amount of the grant. So that would leave very little support for for the project running costs so can one apply and it goes back to this question can one apply for the full award but over two over three years. But I guess you already answered that to some extent right. I think I did that already so basically, maybe a quick, a quick addition to that is the students the post registration should not be seen as a burden really it's it's part of the design of the grant so that there is capacity building. But we are looking at, if you add you plus four master students and two PhDs that's a team of at least seven that are working in this research project so that already should be, you know, should be a vibrant research unit. If you are in a department, for example, so look at these don't look at the post budget students as just research assistants but potential people that are going to help you even become a senior researcher because as you become a senior researcher. There are junior researchers that are coming behind you and together then you're able to have a vibrant ecosystem. But like I said, the grant is up to 500,000 how you distribute that really depends on what you're proposing to do. And along us, all the aspects of the grant including capacity building for the students are catered for. If you can do that in three years please request for three years. Otherwise, you have up to five years. Wonderful. And there's a great question here also about in terms of research leadership and you mentioned in your in your presentation that research leadership is really important. What qualifies as evidence of research leadership. It's a good question. Thank you. So, having a postdoc fellowship program, for example, or having gone through a postdoctoral fellowship alone may not provide you with actually such leadership that we're talking about. So it's a collection of things experiences qualifications that together then you find your ability as a PI to provide that leadership to the students. So obviously publications coming handy if you've been able to publish if country, because ultimately one of the outputs of this grant is that you're able to publish your students are able to begin to publish things through your leadership. So in addition to just, you know, some universities, for example, can employ you directly as a lecturer without requiring you to have had a postdoctoral fellowship. Some universities require that you become you can only join as a postdoc fellow. Okay, so we are leaving that criteria open. Based on your situation or the host institution where you best put together a statement that quantifies what you consider as your research leadership experience. It's publications that you think would give you that definition, then please do. But if you've not done as many publications but you've supervised X number of students you've been able to do to teach, you know, X number of units for X number of years, then put that together and package it. And so that it defines what what your research leadership experience is. Can we just go back to something you mentioned earlier, but which is the the four masters and two PhD as a minimum requirement Nick Simpson writes that in the guidelines it says can recruit coordinating supervisor research team composed of two PhDs and four master students, depending on the requirements of the research field so he says that's not that to him doesn't read like it's a requirement. It's it's can recruit it's it's it's it's a suggestion. But I mean you mentioned that that was a kind of minimum threshold. I'm not sure which part of the guide for applicants is referring to trying to, but the best, the bottom line is, you need to the PR should have at least four master students, and at least two PhD. You can't even you can't hire 20 for example I'm trying to look for the exact text for that. Just one second let me refer to it so that we're on the same page. Yeah, if you go to page six, page six at the top. And this is talking about the eligibility of the principal investigator. So please if you read that thing in for in. In isolation so one of the one of the eligibility criterion for a PR and a legal PR is that they can recruit. Okay, and coordinate and cause supervised so recruitment coordination and cost per vision of a research team should be read in the same sentence. And then to PhD and for master students depending on the requirements of the field. Additional students could be considered on newly justified reasons clearly explained in the grant application with a maximum of four PhD and eight master students. So, I can, we can look again where this is mentioned but the bottom line is, you, every PR should recruit at least four master students, and at least two PhD students. So we can say two to four PhD students and four to eight master students, depending on the grant, the proposal that is being submitted. I hope that does not cause more confusion than clarity. Okay, I'm happy to elaborate. Thank you. There are two questions from participants about whether a partner from the EU is required and presumably the answers now right. A partner from the EU again like I said without defining what that partnership should look like. Yes, there is that possibility you, you, you are welcome to form partnerships within Africa, you know, outside of Africa so long as like we said, the 70% requirement. But also if for example you want to go do some of your work in Europe or the US or wherever. So long as cumulatively don't spend more than six months outside of your hosting situation. So you can help partnerships. You can but you don't have to, you don't have to. It's sort of a natural requirement. Yeah, yeah, that's very good. And can I ask you about the, the question so there is a, you know, applicants can include information on open access gender balance, ethical principles and research integrity. Could they cost in open access publication in hybrid journals. And if so, how do they do this. So, when you're in your budgets as a PI, you know how many publications you want to do. So when you're doing budgeting for APCs at coprocessing charges, you should put a budget that reflects open access publications. Apart from that, you will also have access to the US open access publishing platform, which is an immediate publication platform for all the journal articles, but you're not under obligation to publish there in this particular platform. It's only that it's available for you. So in addition to the US open access, you can also budget for it in your in your budget. And, and just going back to the tricky question of the, the, the 70% of the research team that you just mentioned again. So Hannah must ask, if I am from one African country, but based on applying to perform the research conduct, the research in another African country. How does the 70 rule apply that 70% of the research team will apply. So in principle, remember where your host institution is. That is where the 70% requirement applies so that the research institutions, the masters or the postgraduate students, the technical team have to be the same after the same nationality as the host institution. Yeah, so I hope that's understood. We, we've had here a really good example maybe to come back to the question of career breaks so from an anonymous attendee who says I did my PhD in 2012, but then had two years of a career break. Am I, do I qualify presumably that takes us right up until 2021 right. So, like I said, the best requirement is that you, the PI should have completed your PhD two years ago and not longer than seven years ago, inclusive. However, where a career break happened for adjustifiable applicants that outside that threshold can apply but provide the justification and then the reviewer, the review committees will make a determination whether that should be allowed or not. And if one is again about the eligibility requirements that if one is completing a PhD in 2021 but has been teaching at a university already for five years. Does that qualify. Unfortunately, the two to seven is really a strong requirement and yeah, we expect you to have completed the PhD at the time of application. I should also jump in at this stage and say that medical doctors, if they don't have a PhD also don't qualify. So I've had a few questions from other fora, where someone asks, this is there been a medical doctor, they've been doing this and that do they qualify so unfortunately this context they don't. So the requirement for PhD is really a strong requirement. And just going back to the, the institutional collaborations. We've talked about a lot about networks across Africa and beyond Africa. What about institutional collaborations within a single host country is that allowed encouraged. Absolutely, like I said, we don't define where the collaborations come from it's up to you as the PI, depending on what you are proposed to do. So, please balance. Can you change the PI after, after winning the grant. No, the PI is part of the proposal. So is the host institution so all these things are considered in context in, you know, together. You can for example source your grant to someone else. Given that the priority is to have researchers work within country within the country of their host countries. How will work spanning multiple, multiple countries be supported so you know projects that don't necessarily have a particularly strong focus in one country but across an entire region. So it's up to you as the PI really I mean you know the requirement the provisions for the call so even as you design your research proposal, please have in mind the context against which you're proposing. It will be interesting we've been interesting to see we've been interested to see how you're able to not get that space. So I would say, as an example, you know, could be that a project is supposed to be is proposed to be implemented in Kenya. You have your team at Kenyan host institution, but you're doing some dissemination activities in Uganda out of the near another country or something like that. So in that case, the program implementation team is or meets the 70% threshold. But the field work activities or you know some national activities can can be done elsewhere without necessarily having to go set up and team in the other country where your project is being implemented. So again, you know the framework you know the provisions of the grant. The call for applications design your research proposals to add the up to the provisions. There's a question here about that says what is the cut of age for the application I presume that means whether there's an age limit somewhere. The chronological age. We're not focusing on that we're focused on the amount of time after your PhD. Are there any conditions or requirements for a co principal and the investigator or is it possible to have two principal investigators. One one principal investigator please. If you need to have additional support in terms of you know your research team, have them, you know, as collaborators or research researchers or research assistants, whichever form that takes, but it's only one applicant. And there is a question that takes us back to the political frame of this, which is how close most proposals align with the US with the UN sustainable development goals. Well, that is part of the novelty and creativity that we need to see the proposals I mean these are global regional local frameworks against which you know research development is actually supposed to be done so when you propose as a researcher should be having this frameworks and development blueprints really somewhere in the back of your mind, but there is no specific requirements on how the line is supposed to be done. So the minimum provision is for example that your proposals reflect on while they are open from all fields of research. They should reflect on the EU EU high policy on STI. Okay, but that does not even define exactly what that looks like so you need to be. This is the novelty. This is the creativity. This is what sets aside proposals. So, in your own way of things, but I should also mention that. Leaving these things open means that we really interested in seeing what is out there. So instead of pre defining things which puts at a risk of missing out a few innovative ideas out there. We leave it open like this, especially for especially for this pilot program, so that the PIs the creativity the innovation of the PIs is able to take the center stage rather than what we want to achieve. Okay. So, so, I mean just just just on that so for instance when you are talking about the, you know, the capacities for science and and we've we've we've discussed we've seen earlier how originally in these in the way that was considered the, the EU policy dialogue really envisaged human capital developments and then then you would encourage researchers to rethink through how their work can do that or, you know, can can can subscribe. You would encourage them to just articulate themselves how their work could could could could achieve that without being too narrow on on these objectives. The main objective of the arise grant is to broaden and strengthen African science base that would then contribute to the transmission of Africa into a knowledge based on innovation that continent. What this means is one to see transformed lives through science. How you want to do that. This is the innovation that we're talking about. So, based on this general objective of the arise grant, we leave it at the discretion of the PIs or the applicants to really define this. What in that understanding and consideration would be an ideal proposal to really respond to this main objective. Okay, great. That's that's right. Oderil where Silamana is asking what if there's a recommended percentage or an ideal percentage about the share of the total cost that might be made of the personal personnel costs I mean is there is an is there an ideal personnel cost that you have could it be 50% of the budget or you know of course taking into into into into account the institutional requirements for different levels. So, we in the guide for applications have given reference to the as cost guidelines policy. So, that should give you a general idea of what the provisions in different budget lines should be like. And, but having said that we, we didn't want to be to be to descriptive again. Refer to the as cost deadlines as a general guide in terms of what the number should look like, but work closely with your host institution though.